The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The problem with 'rights' > Comments

The problem with 'rights' : Comments

By John Spender, published 9/5/2008

There are times, in war or during emergencies, when individual rights have to suffer for the good of the whole.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All
What tosh. Since when has torture produced accurate results? We've had this debate on OLO before.

Some people do "live in a post 9-11 world...defined by the enemies of western civilisation." They live in fear and would find no end of comfort seeing others share in it.
Posted by bennie, Sunday, 11 May 2008 9:15:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A very reasonable and mundane presentation of an issue which I suspect will become ever more important to address in coming years.

The problem with dogmatic "rightists" is that they rarely allow for dilution of their stance. For example "Right to Life" exponents will not concede the death penalty on any matter no what crime has been committed.

The logical consequence of which is that ANYBODY can take the life of another person by whom they may feel aggrieved, or against whom they may simply hold a grudge, provided they are willing to submit to ten or fifteen years imprisonment with its attendant reeducation.

The scenario is becoming very familiar indeed - Do whatever you want then immediately throw your hands in the air shouting your guilt and sorrow while in the same breath requesting the services of a good lawyer and a counselor.

The name of the game played by "rightist abolitionists" is that no matter how heinous the crime committed against no matter how many people, the guilty party NEVER has to have their life on the line.

Proponents of capital punishment for capital crimes (like myself) usually argue that the motives and circumstances of the case should be considered before a person pays the ultimate price for the ultimate crime.

I profoundly resent that a price of ten or fifteen years incarceration is the price of my life to anybody who cares to take it.
Posted by BenLomond, Sunday, 11 May 2008 3:20:34 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
well said, bennie. in fact, the true "enemies of western civilisation" are psychopaths like spender, trying to drag us back to the dark ages.

benlomond, your torture hypothetical is absurd and irrelevant. it is a poisonous question with only a poisonous answer. the reality is, whatever the law, any hyper-extreme situation as you imagine is going to be addressed with hyper-extreme action. this is simply the logic and the ethics of war.

but you don't legislate the powers of the state under the paranoid fear of ridiculously implausible nightmares, to sanction disgusting acts. this is cultural and moral perversion.

and how does spender justify his sadistic fantasies? because of the threat of "radical islam". this is paranoia to the point of lunacy. somehow hitler wasn't enough of a threat, and stalin wasn't enough of a threat. but a ragtag gang of murderous thugs is the overwhelming threat to western civilization. such a threat that we have overthrow centuries of development of the notion of rights and the rule of law.

to hear this disgraceful argument from a radio shock jock is bad enough. to hear it from a qc is thoroughly loathsome.

stop dealing with your lurid hypotheticals, and start addressing actuals. consider how even now america is torturing people, including undeniably innocent people, and destroying the evidence. this is the reality. this is torture in the hands of the good guys. good guys? it's a contradiction in terms. it is orwellian.

this is what torturers do. this is its real nature. maybe it doesn't bother you, but it disgusts me beyond expression, as do obfuscating apologists such as spender.
Posted by bushbasher, Sunday, 11 May 2008 7:21:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What about your own rights, Mr Spender? Do you uphold your own right never to made by your government to torture another human being?
As a lawyer, you must be aware of the concept (if not the reality) of equality before the law. You should also be aware that a man who commissions another to murder his wife is still considered guilty, even if his hands are clean.
Any government of the people that condones murder, makes murderers of all the people.
Likewise torture.
If you managed to find your torturer, and condoned his crime, would you then ask him home to have tea with the family?
Would you recommend him to your daughter, as a hero of the people?
You appear to have a dubious grasp of ethics, Mr Spender.
Posted by Grim, Sunday, 11 May 2008 7:35:24 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Bennie

you said:

"What tosh. Since when has torture produced accurate results?"

I think you need to research this from reality rather than GreenLeftWeekly mate. Just the 'thought' of torture can be enough in some cases.

http://www.navyseals.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-133415.html

Keith Hall, aka Captain Crunch was a CIA operative who was tasked to find out who was responsible for the bombing of the US embassy in Beruit.(prior to the Barracks bombing)

He was interviewed on the History chanel, and he describes how, with an unfettered hand he discovered the whole network, and mainly that Iran was behind it, and..that Iran had a covert operation against all Americans in the Middle East.(All he did was thump the Lebanese prisoner)

They had enough intel from his work to prevent the Barracks bombing, but due to 'denial' mode in Washington at the thought that Iran was out to 'get' them... they couldn't handle it... Hall was sacked and disgraced....then.. the barracks was bombed. BOOOM, many other incidents followed.

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/in_the_media/in_the_media_show.htm?doc_id=198518

You can make a judgement call about whether the lives of 250 people is worth less than a bit of a roughing up of a known enemy.

Just out of curiosity.. how much value DO you place on the security of your country, relative to some coercion of an enemy operative? Coersion indeed works when you can verify the info and if its wrong, well..that should be obvious.

From what I observe, your thinking is incapable of comprehending that the 'law' is pretty much just to keep we masses in line, and there is a different 'code' which all countries live by..and that code is "do what you have to" to survive.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Sunday, 11 May 2008 9:38:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
At first glance, you would think this article was an argument against adopting a bill of rights. But it is more an apologetic for the use of state-sanctioned torture to prevent a terrorist attack. Clearly the autor has no moral compass and is willing to violate human rights for information that may be totally useless and from a suspect who may well be innocent. Even if it were useful in preventing such a catastrophic attack that the author maintains we are facing, if that was the only piece of information the authorities had then what a dismal failure of the intelligence services because there are many other means to source information than resorting to torture!
Posted by free2speak, Sunday, 11 May 2008 11:20:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy